When the controversial “Bridgegate” scandal boiled over in the Garden State earlier this year, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie shielded criticisms that he was a political bully, by arguing politics’ nature isn’t for the faint of heart.
“Politics ain’t beanbag,” Christie told hordes of national media during a January press conference, borrowing a phrase made famous by a late 19th century Chicago politician. The aphorism reflects the coarseness that is often involved in politics, particularly during a campaign when attack ads are as common as pumpkin spice coffee during the fall season.
The Republican governor was asked if his hard-nosed style and sometimes sharp tongue towards political opponents created an environment that allowed his aides to think it was OK to shut down two lanes on the busy George Washington Bridge during rush hour as a form of political retribution.
Christie, of course, denied that was the case and quipped he was no bully.
Coarseness in politics is nothing new, but it seems as if our political leaders have ratcheted up the rhetoric in recent years, contributing to the divisiveness that plagues government on nearly all levels. It’s a trend that must be toned down if the country and state are going to solve the major problems that confront them.
Such boorish political behavior was on display in Connecticut recently, when Democratic Gov. Dannel P. Malloy and Republican Tom Foley traded a litany of personal attacks during the closing minutes of an Oct. 2 gubernatorial debate held at the UConn campus in Storrs.
Foley slung the first mud ball, criticizing Malloy for being the target of a state corruption investigation during his time as Stamford’s mayor. No charges were ever brought up in the case, and Malloy was cleared of any wrongdoing.
Malloy fired back, making references to two separate car crash incidents that led to Foley’s arrests in the early 1980s. Malloy has also continuously tried to paint Foley as a greedy former businessman, whose private equity ventures sucked the life and capital out of companies, while Foley walked away with millions of dollars.
The personal attacks lasted for nearly 10 minutes, starting as typical campaign banter and then evolving into what felt like a high school cafeteria food fight. But it wasn’t just Foley and Malloy who had egg on their face at the end of night; the citizens of Connecticut suffered as well.
At a time when Connecticut faces serious economic challenges — another looming budget deficit, slow job growth, an aging workforce, etc. — we need candidates who are more concerned about the issues than scoring political points in what amounts to a name-calling contest.
To be clear, personal character does matter when it comes to choosing elected politicians, particularly for offices as high as governor. But the below-the-belt politics recently on display in the governor’s race did nothing to advance the electorate’s beliefs that either candidate stands on higher moral ground.
With just three weeks remaining until the Nov. 4 election, we urge both candidates to put aside the personal attacks, and go after each other on the issues. Neither candidate has provided a clear roadmap for returning Connecticut back to its days of economic prosperity.
That’s the real message voters, particularly those in the business community, want to hear rather than the sophomoric personal attacks recently put on display.
